Bug#941198: initscripts: packages should ship systemd units

[Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org>]

Sean Whitton writes:
>> +Packages that include system services should include ``systemd`` units
>> +to start or stop services.
>> +
>>  Packages that include daemons for system services should place scripts
>>  in ``/etc/init.d`` to start or stop services at boot time or during a
>>  change of runlevel. These scripts should be named
>
> The text now has both "Packages that include system services ..." and
> "Packages that include daemons for system services".  Do you take these
> to refer to different things?  Surely we can combine the language somehow.

No.  I just wanted to have a simple initial proposal to start with.
Arguably one can ship systemd services for more things (such as
dbus-activated or timer-activated services), but I don't think that
difference matters here.

I omitted the "daemons for" as both service files and initscripts don't
always start a persistent background process (daemon), but can also run
one-time actions.

To combine the language, maybe the second paragraph should be changed to
something like

    [To support alternative init systems] packages should additionally
    place initscripts in ``/etc/init.d``. These scripts should be named
    ...

(with or without the text in brackets).

(I think the naming rule also isn't that good: if upstream includes some
startup scripts it might be more useful to use those, even when named
differently than the package, to match upstream documentation and other
distributions.)

Ansgar